Peter Jones <pjones@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > It's fair to say that rawhide doesn't serve the same purpose any more - since > we're branching so much earlier, the thing that used to be rawhide is > essentially the branch. But the newer form of rawhide does have a feature - > it allows those of us working on multiple features that aren't ready yet to > stage them farther in advance, and to work on them more asynchronously. That's the theory at least. The problem that I see with this "it's okay to leave rawhide very broken for long stretches of time" mentality is that leaving rawhide broken imperils the ability of *other* developers to work on *their* massively unstable features. Not every developer can be an expert on every part of the system, or spare the time to find out how to work around breakage in parts of the system they don't know. So if rawhide is broken, they can't use it as a test environment, and what are they going to do then? Leaving rawhide busted is a discourtesy to your fellow developers. Don't do it. If you've got code that doesn't work yet, play with it in your own repo, but don't push it out where the rest of us have to deal with it. Maybe this suggests that we need to work a little harder on supporting and/or encouraging use of "rawhide branches", so that multiple developers can work on a shared piece of instability without affecting all of Fedora-land. regards, tom lane -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
